DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.
Complaint No. 453
Instituted on: 07.08.2014
Decided on: 01.04.2015
Manjit Kaur W/o Hakam Singh 2. Hakam Singh S/o Sohan Singh, both residents of Village Balian, Tehsil Dhuri, District Sangrur.
…Complainants
Versus
1. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Depot Sangrur, Mehlan Road, Village Kheri, Tehsil and District Sangrur through its Depot Manager.
2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, CBU 2, Magnet House, 4th Floor, N.M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai through its GM/MD.
…Opposite parties
For the complainant : Shri Rajinder Goyal, Adv.
For OP No.1 : Shri Kali Ram Garg, Adv
For OP No.2 : Shri Ashish Garg, Adv.
Quorum: Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
K.C.Sharma, Member
Sarita Garg, Member
Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.
1. Smt Manjit Kaur and Shri Hakam Singh, complainants (referred to as complainants in short) have preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that son of the complainants, namely, Randhir Singh (hereinafter referred to as DLA in short) was the owner of the truck bearing registration number PB-13-AB-3517. It is further averred that there was a scheme of OP number 1 as per which fleet cards were issued to the owners of the vehicles who obtained the said scheme. DLA also became member of the above said scheme of OP number 1 and a fleet card number 7132010635160034 was issued which was valid upto 9/2015 and under the scheme the DLA was insured for Rs.1,00,000/- in case of accidental death, as the policy was issued by OP number 2. It is further averred that on 30.10.2013, when the DLA was on his way in truck along with driver Ajaib Singh, the truck of the DLA met with an accident within the jurisdiction of P.S. Kanwan, District Dhar and the DLA died due to injuries sustained in the said accident, of which FIR number 372 dated 30.10.2013 was lodged at PS Kanwan, District Dhar. Thereafter the complainants approached OP number 1 who advised to lodge the claim with OP number 2, as such the complainants lodged the claim with Op number 2, but the OP number 2 repudiated the claim as ‘no claim’ as the card was never issued in the name of Randhir Singh. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainants have prayed to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of death of the life assured Shri Randhir Singh along with interest @ 18% per annum from 30.10.2013 till realisation and further to pay compensation and litigation expenses.
2. In reply filed by OP number 1, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs as is not covered under the definition of consumer as envisaged in section 2(i)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act. The maintainability of the complaint is also disputed and it has been alleged that the OP number 1 has been dragged into unwanted litigation. On merits, it has been stated that the fleet card was issued in the name of Hakam Singh on 24.9.2012 and Op number 1 has no concern with the issuance of insurance cover to the owners of the trucks. OP number 1 is not in any way concerned with the accidental benefit due to death of Randhir Singh as OP number 1 had only issued the fleet card to Shri Hakam Singh. It is stated that OP number 1 is not responsible for filing the claim of Randhir Singh to the insurance company on behalf of the alleged deceased. It is stated that there is no liability of the OP number 1 towards the claim in question.
3. In reply filed by Op number 2, it is admitted that OP number 2 issued a Extra Power Fleet card insurance policy in favour of the respondent number 1 w.e.f. 6.4.2013 to 5.4.2014 and the sum insured was Rs.1,00,000/- regarding accidental death of fleet owner. It is further stated that Op number 2 received intimation on 20.1.2014 from Shri Hakam Singh complainant number 2 regarding death of his son Randhir Singh. Op number 2 sent a letter to the complainant for clarify the reason for delay in submitting the claim. It is further stated that no reply was sent by the complainants. Thereafter it was found that no fleet card was issued to Randhir Singh and he was not insured with the OP number 2, as such, his claim was repudiated. Any deficiency in service on the part of OP number 2 has been denied.
4. The learned counsel for the complainants has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of RC, Ex.C-3 copy of fleet card, Ex.C-4 copy of death certificate, Ex.C-5 copy of letter dated 26.2.2014, Ex.C-6 copy of FIR, Ex.C-7 copy of final report, Ex.C-8 copy of crime detail form, Ex.C-9 copy of PMR, Ex.C-10 copy of form number 47, Ex.C-11 copy of cover note, Ex.C-12 copy of DL, Ex.C-13 copy of guide book, Ex.C-14 copy of letter and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.OP1/1 copy of application form, Ex.OP1/2 copy of policy, Ex.OP1/3 affidavit and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 2 has produced Ex.OP2/1 copy of policy, Ex.OP2/2 copy of intimation and Ex.Op2/3 affidavit and closed evidence.
5. We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.
6. In the present case, the complainants have alleged that though the son of the complainants, namely, Randhir Singh was the owner of truck bearing registration number PB-13-AB-3517 and was issued a fleet card bearing number 8132010635160034 which was valid udpto 9/2015, the opposite party did not make the payment of claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainants as Shri Randhir Singh died in an accidental death. The learned counsel for the complainant has alleged deficiency in service on the part of OPs. On the other hand, the stand of the Ops for non payment of the insurance claim is that Shri Randhir Singh was never insured by the OPs nor Shri Randhir Singh availed the services of the OPs at any point of time. However, it is admitted that the OP number 2 issued a extra power fleet card insurance policy in favour of OP number 1 for the period from 6.4.2013 to 5.4.2014 subject to the terms and conditions of the policy regarding accidental death of fleet owner for Rs.1,00,000/-. The complainant has filed his own sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 is the copy of registration certificate of the truck in question i.e. bearing number PB-13-AB-3517 which is in the name of Randhir Singh, but the card in question Ex.C-3 is in the name of Hakam Singh. The complainant has produced various other documents, but he has not produced the relevant card issued by OP number 1 showing that Shri Randhir Singh, the deceased was ever insured with the OP number 2. We have also perused the affidavit of Shri Mukesh Gupta, Asstt. Manager, Retail Sales of OP number 1 wherein he has clearly mentioned that the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is not in any way concerned with the payment of accidental benefits due to the death of Randhir Singh as Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. had only issued the fleet card to one Hakam Singh on the basis of form filled by Shri Hakam Singh at the time of applying for fleet card, which is on record as Ex.OP1/1. Again Ex.OP2/3 is the affidavit of Shri A.S.Dhingra, Sr. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. which clearly shows that the claim has been rightly repudiated as no fleet card was issued in favour of Randhir Singh, now deceased.
7. We have very carefully perused the whole of the case file and found that the complainants have miserably failed to prove on record that Shri Randhir Singh was insured under the OPs for Rs.1,00,000/-, as no such card has been produced on record to prove that Shri Randhir Singh was the fleet card holder or was insured with the Ops. In the present case, the stand of the OPs is also that the OP number 2 never insured the deceased Shri Randhir Singh. In the circumstances of the case, we find no case made out for deficiency in service on the part of the OPs in repudiating the claim of the complainants.
8. In view of our above discussion and circumstances of the case, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.
Pronounced.
April 1, 2015.
(Sukhpal Singh Gill)
President
(K.C.Sharma)
Member
(Sarita Garg)
Member
